AndrewBurns wrote:- Bigger disk which means bigger issue in case of crashes. I'm sorry what? What issues, how does a larger disk make any difference (a larger disk would actually run colder than a smaller one).

They might be looking at the potential for serious injury. A thin, round, hot piece of steel has the potential to do some pretty serious damage in the event of a crash.

AndrewBurns wrote:- Difference of braking performance between disk brakes and rim brakes that may cause crashes inside the peloton.

I would agree with that. Either all bikes have discs or none. It's only fair. There are many other things which are controlled in racing, and pretty much all for the same reasons they've mentioned.

singlespeedscott wrote:I still give it 2 years and they will be legal.

rkelsen wrote:They might be looking at the potential for serious injury. A thin, round, hot piece of steel has the potential to do some pretty serious damage in the event of a crash.

I hear this a lot but personally I think it's an invented red herring. Disks have been used for years in MTB racing and now CX racing and I've never heard of them causing any injury greater than the occasional careless burn. Yes I understand that the chance of a mass pileup is higher in road races but people still come together in MTB and CX and I've never heard of someone losing a finger or whatever gruesome thing is supposed to happen. Quite frankly bicycles already have enough spinning metal things that are equally likely to hurt you in a crash like the spokes of the wheel, chainrings etc. In a sport where you often exceed 70 kph down hills wearing lycra and a bit of foam on your head I think the assertion that brake disks somehow increase the severity of injury in a crash is baseless.

rkelsen wrote:I would agree with that. Either all bikes have discs or none. It's only fair. There are many other things which are controlled in racing, and pretty much all for the same reasons they've mentioned.

Fairness doesn't come into it, if disks are available then people can buy them or not if they want to, it's like saying it's unfair for one team to have a lighter groupset than another... As for safety as I've already mentioned the actual braking distance isn't limited by brake technology but by rider position and front tyre traction. On any road bike on a dry grippy surface nobody can stop faster than the deceleration that will cause the rear wheel to lift off the ground. In less ideal surfaces braking distance is limited by tyre traction. If there are riders in the peloton with disk brakes they'll have the benefit of better brake feel but somebody behind them will be able to stop exactly as fast as them on rim brakes (they will probably just have to use more force on the brake levers).

AndrewBurns wrote:In a sport where you often exceed 70 kph down hills wearing lycra and a bit of foam on your head I think the assertion that brake disks somehow increase the severity of injury in a crash is baseless.

Fair enough.

AndrewBurns wrote:Fairness doesn't come into it, if disks are available then people can buy them or not if they want to, it's like saying it's unfair for one team to have a lighter groupset than another...

Racing bikes are subject to a strict set of rules in order to keep the sport fair. FWIW, it would be absolutely unfair for one team to use lighter bikes than anyone else, which is why weights are strictly regulated.

As mentioned above, the UCI rules don't prevent you from buying whatever you like. Why should a set of racing rules dictate what equipment you buy?

rkelsen wrote:As mentioned above, the UCI rules don't prevent you from buying whatever you like. Why should a set of racing rules dictate what equipment you buy?

Because I occasionally race and unfortunately even the low grades I race at are subject to UCI regulations, so even though probably 90-95% of the time my road bike isn't used for racing it still has to be UCI legal as I can't afford to buy a dedicated race bike. Also UCI regulations directly or indirectly drive the evolution of road bikes (or lack there of in recent years) because big manufacturers generally aren't willing to spend money designing a model of bike that their pro teams can't race with. I really think the UCI is lagging behind in this case with both major groupset manufacturers selling disk brake equipped road groups and many major and minor frame/bicycle manufacturers selling or demoing disk-equipped road bike models already. I have no doubt that the UCI will eventually cave but I wish they would be a bit more pro-active and embrace innovation more.

AndrewBurns wrote:Because I occasionally race and unfortunately even the low grades I race at are subject to UCI regulations, so even though probably 90-95% of the time my road bike isn't used for racing it still has to be UCI legal as I can't afford to buy a dedicated race bike.

Well then you have to play by the rules. Personally, if I was racing, I'd try to save up some cash for a dedicated racing bike...

finally got the Hy/Rd hydraulic. Comes with a paltry 160mm disc which I will obviously throw away. it bolts straight onto the 180mm adaptor for the BB7.

And setup? What a dream. Compared to the BB7 which is essentially impossible to ever get to work right, this is sheer bliss. There is no setup. You just bolt it on and it's already perfect. You can immediately adjust the cable up as tight as you like, so you have max. braking with just a tiny pull, and there's no rubbing!!!

Can't wait to ride it tomorrow. Compared to a BB7 this is joy, bliss, marvelous, wonderful, beautiful.

mrgolf wrote:I do that now. Thats why I want to change. 1. It's too heavy for climbing races. 2. I run 45mm tubs and changing the pads and wheels over every time I race is a pain in the arse, but is also a first world problem.

Your 7.3kg bike is too heavy for climbing? You can't be serious.

Google some of the physics on weight and you'll get an understanding of how irrellivant a few kg is.

mrgolf wrote:I do that now. Thats why I want to change. 1. It's too heavy for climbing races. 2. I run 45mm tubs and changing the pads and wheels over every time I race is a pain in the arse, but is also a first world problem.

Your 7.3kg bike is too heavy for climbing? You can't be serious.

Google some of the physics on weight and you'll get an understanding of how irrellivant a few kg is.

Depends who you are talking to... If you are talking to a climber at the pointy end of A grade ( which he is ) who wins or loses his races on the climbs... Then a couple of kgs is going to make quite a difference.

Yes, it appears the problem is after some point, but the earlier ones are OK. Most manufacturers have recall problems from time to time.

...the stop sell applies to both versions of the brakes with serial numbers between 36T30000000 and 42T39999999 shipped to bike assembly points and after-market distribution channels after 5 September 2013.

Nobody wrote:Yes, it appears the problem is after some point, but the earlier ones are OK. Most manufacturers have recall problems from time to time.

...the stop sell applies to both versions of the brakes with serial numbers between 36T30000000 and 42T39999999 shipped to bike assembly points and after-market distribution channels after 5 September 2013.

Yep. It's a FUBAR for sure, but it's hardly a premature death of the product line.

It's probably a dodgy O-ring or something simple like that. They swapped suppliers, had a QC failure, and can't be certain that product already shipped doesn't have the same fault. When you're dealing with brakes, any potential failure is safety critical, and you have to jump on it. Expensive, but so is a class action defense if things start failing in the field.

I work with car brakes. Sometimes it's necessary to pause for thought, and re-phrase an engineering judgement by adding the words "your honour" at the end to imagine how your reasoning would stand up under investigation if something did go wrong. You never want a recall, but if you've gotta, you've gotta.

FWIW I picked up a new bike the other day with SRAM Red hydraulic rim brakes on it, checked out the serial numbers the other night and they were well below the recall range. I did read somewhere that they "estimate" less than 500 of the recalled brakes made it to customers.

As for the road disc thing. Well I did have a deposit down on a roadie with SRAMs discs, but in the end just couldn't handle the thought of spending a big chunk of cash on a bike that would sit out the summer race season. So I'm on rim brakes till the next upgrade, probably 3-4 years, by which time the UCI should have its stuff sorted out and some standards will be in place (spacing, thru-axles, etc).

mrgolf wrote:I do that now. Thats why I want to change. 1. It's too heavy for climbing races. 2. I run 45mm tubs and changing the pads and wheels over every time I race is a pain in the arse, but is also a first world problem.

Your 7.3kg bike is too heavy for climbing? You can't be serious.

Google some of the physics on weight and you'll get an understanding of how irrellivant a few kg is.

Depends who you are talking to... If you are talking to a climber at the pointy end of A grade ( which he is ) who wins or loses his races on the climbs... Then a couple of kgs is going to make quite a difference.

He can't drop "a couple of kgs" - the bike is 400g off being underweight...

jacks1071 wrote:Your 7.3kg bike is too heavy for climbing? You can't be serious.

Google some of the physics on weight and you'll get an understanding of how irrellivant a few kg is.

Depends who you are talking to... If you are talking to a climber at the pointy end of A grade ( which he is ) who wins or loses his races on the climbs... Then a couple of kgs is going to make quite a difference.

He can't drop "a couple of kgs" - the bike is 400g off being underweight...

Last time I checked, Club A grade races weren't UCI governed.

I would hazard a guess and say there are a fair few riding Club races with sub 6.8kg bikes.

Either way, I think we both know TLL didn't actually mean "couple" as in 2. I suggest he used the phrase to broadly and colloquially refer to a significant loss of weight, which to me would preferably be down to around the 6.5kg mark. Its not that hard to go well below 6kg now. A mate has a Cannondale Ultimate which weighs 5.5 and Stevens have an off the shelf bike at 4.9. Not interested in going silly. Stay reasonable but end up with a bike that will allow me to shave some seconds off climb times.

I can easily climb on my 10kg CX bike, but nowhere near as fast as my roadie. Unnecessary weight is a stopwatch killer.

Who is online

About the Australian Cycling Forums

The largest cycling discussion forum in Australia for all things bike; from new riders to seasoned bike nuts, the Australian Cycling Forums are a welcoming community where you can ask questions and talk about the type of bikes and cycling topics you like.